Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/1997 Pacific hurricane season/Archive 2

1997 Pacific hurricane season[edit]

Second try. It is well-referenced, meets standards for the appropriate WikiProject, has many PD pictures, covers everything in detail, has appropriate use of spinoff articles. This is a self-nom. Miss Michelle | Talk to Michelle 23:25, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Good. Everyking 01:44, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Good work but there are several stub sections, short paragraphs and short sentences. — Wackymacs 07:38, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- - Support Looks excellent now. — Wackymacs 20:12, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- I expanded the sections on Tropical Depressions a bit. Could you please name which other sections you find too short? Some of the sections are short because there isn't really a lot to say about a cyclone that lasted 2 days and never threatened land. Miss Michelle | Talk to Michelle 00:14, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  - Almost all the sections are too short, because there are too many subheadings. For example, 'Tropical Depression Three-E' and Tropical Depression Five-E' are both only one sentence long. Each section should be up to two paragraphs long. If there isn't enough context to put there, then they should not have their own sections. — Wackymacs 07:20, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    - I put the depressions in their own section. Miss Michelle | Talk to Michelle
Support, though I'd recommend expanding the stub sections. –Hollow Wilerding 14:20, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comment -- would it be possible to reorganize the article so that the storms are treated by maximum intensity? That is, first cover tropical depressions, then tropical storms, then hurricanes, then Paka. Keep them in chronological order within each section, but cover all the tropical depressions in one section (no subsections) so that there aren't any super short sections, as there are now. --Spangineer^es (háblame) 18:11, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- I put the depressions in their own section after the named storms. The named storms are in the order they formed during the season. Miss Michelle | Talk to Michelle
  - That's a start. Now I'm wondering if separating it by month would be helpful... the bottom line is that this article has a really big table of contents for the amount of information, and that means that sections should be consolidated. I'll make the change so you see what I mean. --Spangineer^es (háblame) 22:22, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I've changed the navigational structure of the article so that there aren't any short sections, so I'll support now. --Spangineer^es (háblame) 20:30, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Because of the radical and bold changes, this article is very different from when it was first nominated. For that reason, I am closing the nomination and sending it to Peer Review because some of the original comments may not apply to the changed version. Miss Michelle | Talk to Michelle 00:30, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]